When Did You Realize There’s No Equal Justice In America?

For me, it happened back in 2009 when Eric Holder, Obama’s Attorney General, dropped the prosecution of members of the Black Panthers who had been filmed with weapons outside of Philadelphia polling places harassing and threatening white voters. The George Bush administration’s DOJ had gathered evidence and was moving forward in prosecuting the cases when the Obama administration came in and Holder was confirmed the nation’s top law enforcement officer. Almost immediately and without hesitation, he disregarded the clear and convincing evidence and announced that DOJ would no longer prosecute the suspects.

Totally unapologetic, Holder stated in congressional testimony, “When you compare what people endured in the South in the 60s to try to get the right to vote for African Americans, and to compare what people were subjected to there to what happened in Philadelphia—which was inappropriate, certainly that… to describe it in those terms I think does a great disservice to people who put their lives on the line, who risked all, for my people.”

Uh, excuse me? What does that have to do with anything? And my people? Shouldn’t American law enforcement officials represent all people?

There was certainly racism in the South in the 60s, as well as in the North and in the West. That was not good. Everybody gets that. But how does that render actions taken in the late 2000s legal or justified? Does that mean that if my family or my friend was wronged 50 years ago that I can go commit crimes today? So far, that was what the U.S. AG was indicating.

But not so fast. What do you look like? What is your melanin level? What is the ethnicity of your last name? Do you qualify as one of my people?

Apparently only persons of certain approved victim groups qualify for this special exemption from legal consequences. This is not really a debatable point. Can anyone with cognitive powers greater than Joe Biden really argue this? Can you imagine the non-prosecution of white men caught on camera standing outside polling stations with clubs, yelling racist remarks at black voters, and threatening them?

For some of you, it may have been when the FBI declined to prosecute Hillary Clinton for violating federal law concerning the protection of classified information by use of a personal cell phone and a private, non-secure server. To anyone loosely familiar with government rules on these matters, the offenses were clear. As I am told by many federal employees, using her personal cell phone or her at-home unsecured server for sensitive emails should have been cause for termination. Then, to destroy the evidence when faced with a subpoena should lead to prosecution, conviction, and jail time. It’s not complicated.

In his famous statement on July 2016, James Comey said, “Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before bringing charges. There are obvious considerations, like the strength of the evidence, especially regarding intent… As a result, although the Department of Justice makes final decisions on matters like this, we are expressing to Justice our view that no charges are appropriate in this case.”

Hmmmmmm. So while there is evidence of crimes that were ongoing and of a potentially serious nature to the nation, no consequences resulted for the Secretary of State who was running for President. While others who commit similar actions would end up in prison, for Ms. Clinton, there is no accountability. But you may argue, what about the law, the rules? It’s right there in black and white. Silly, silly arguments. Who’s in charge here anyway? Those ideas are so yesterday. So back in time. Get with the new program.

Or if neither of those events did it for you, maybe the treatment of protesters/rioters over the past year or so finally convinced you. If a person dressed in a dark helmet, mask, and shield, brought with them clubs, projectiles, caustic chemicals, and lasers, and looted and set fire to buildings, then that person was participating in a protest that is protected by the Constitution. However, if a person spoke up at a school board meeting in opposition to racist curriculum, that person is a potential domestic terrorist and a threat to America.

The summer of 2020 was filled with violent protests, rioting, looting, and attacks on police across the nation. Protesters came prepared to hide their identities and engage in violence. And they did. Stores were looted and burned. People were killed. Many police officers were injured and there were attempts to burn police stations with officers locked inside. Courthouses were seized and small areas within cities such as Portland, Oregon literally declared their independence from the United States. Armed protesters monitored the perimeter of such independent, autonomous zones. These were the mostly peaceful protests that did not compel many prosecutions by district attorneys or condemnation by liberal politicians.

Vice President Kamala Harris offered mixed messages on the riots by saying, “Nothing that we have achieved that has been about progress, in particular around civil rights, has come without a fight, and so I always am going to interpret these protests as an essential component of evolution in our country—as an essential component or mark of a real democracy.”

In contrast, many people have been showing up to speak at school board meetings to protest the teaching of the racist CRT (Critical Race Theory). There has been yelling. People have been angry. There have been a few arrests, but no one has been killed. No looting has occurred. No buildings have been burned down. Police have not been attacked. The parents attending the meetings have not come wearing helmets, hard masks, or shields, nor have they brought projectiles, chemicals, lasers, or clubs.

Yet, Biden’s Attorney General, Merrick Garland, without presenting any evidence of violent threats, stated in a memorandum, “Those who dedicate their time and energy to ensuring that our children receive a proper education in a safe environment deserve to be able to do their work without fear for their safety… The Department takes these incidents seriously and is committed to using its authority and resources to discourage these threats, identify them when they occur, and prosecute them when appropriate. In the coming days, the Department will announce a series of measures designed to address the rise in criminal conduct directed towards school personnel.”

So, let’s get this straight. Leftists looting, burning, and vandalizing are okay. Protected speech. Threatening and beating people and literally rebelling against the authority of the United States are okay. But if you are against racism and speak up at a public meeting, the Department of Justice may bring the mighty powers of government to investigate you as a possible terrorist.

There are countless other examples if you hadn’t realized it through these events. Or maybe you see it now. There is no longer equal justice under the law in America.

Subscribe on YouTube

Free the People publishes opinion-based articles from contributing writers. The opinions and ideas expressed do not always reflect the opinions and ideas that Free the People endorses. We believe in free speech, and in providing a platform for open dialog. Feel free to leave a comment!

A.T. Moses

A.T. Moses is a father, an economics professor, and a little league coach in the Washington, DC area.

View Full Bio

1 comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Featured Product

Join Us